The latest news from and about EngenderHealth, a leading international nonprofit working in sexual and reproductive health. For more information, visit our web site or join us on YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter.

Friday, January 23, 2009

Essence Magazine talked with Dr. Ana Langer, EngenderHealth's president, about the Global Gag Rule and why lifting it was so important. “Africa has been most severely affected,” she said. “Many clinics had to close because they declined to sign the global gag rule, and were not able to provide other services such as prenatal care, newborns’ health, cervical cancer screenings and vaccinations.”

EngenderHealth is thrilled to announce that President Barack Obama has rescinded the Global Gag Rule!

Thanks to all of you who signed our petition and made your voices heard. Your involvement and commitment paid off.

This is only the first of many positive changes to come, and there is still much work to be done to advance sexual and reproductive health. EngenderHealth has identified the top 5 actions for the Obama Administration, including investing more in international family planning programs, which remain severely underfunded. We will be mobilizing around this and other reproductive health priorities in the coming months. Stay tuned!

Tuesday, January 6, 2009

Over the last eight years, the impact of the Global Gag Rule has been harshest in parts of the world most in need of better health services. The policy forbids any foreign organization receiving U.S. family planning aid from providing, referring to, or advocating for abortion services in their country—even with their own funds, and even if abortion is legal. Organizations that do not comply lose all U.S. support, including essential supplies of contraceptives.

I am a physician and was working with EngenderHealth in Ghana at the time that President Bush reinstated the policy during his first days in office. We felt the effects almost immediately, as the Global Gag Rule began to limit our reach as an organization. We could no longer work with local partners who put women’s health and the integrity of their medical staff above U.S. policy, even though they counted on us for support that made it possible for them to offer care in rural communities where no other health services were available.

In Ghana, not only were supplies of contraceptives cut in half, but clinics were forced to shut down or drastically reduce their family planning, maternal and child health, and HIV services. And there is no evidence that that this policy has reduced abortion. Indeed, unsafe abortion remains among the leading causes of maternal deaths.

So, while the Global Gag Rule was designed to reduce abortion, the policy’s domino effect has had negative effects on people’s lives in ways that have nothing to do with abortion. Because health clinics often offered integrated care, the loss in funding due to the Global Gag Rule has had dramatic consequences for services like immunizations for children, voluntary counseling and testing for HIV, and treatment for malaria. Throughout Africa, and in parts of Asia and Latin America, entire communities have seen their health care compromised by this policy.

But we are at a turning point. President-elect Obama has the opportunity to repeal the Global Gag Rule, and we must put pressure on him to do so. No doubt there are a number of priorities that he must address immediately (the economy, two ongoing wars), but getting rid of the gag will cost nothing. Rather, it will be a symbolic move saying that the United States cares about women’s health and rights and about the rural poor.

I was in Tanzania at the time of the U.S. election, and I felt a great sense of excitement and expectation. Visiting a clinic where EngenderHealth had worked before the Global Gag Rule was reinstated—a clinic that has faced years of dwindling support and difficult times—I found the few remaining staff exuding optimism.

“We believe that things will change now, that your president will understand how American policies directly affect us,” the chief doctor told me. She, like many others, hope—some even pray—that the Global Gag Rule will be lifted, that their funding and main source for contraceptive supplies will be renewed, and that they will no longer have to turn away people who walk miles to their clinic for care.

Indeed, as the United States reexamines its role in the world and the ways in which it can restore its image abroad, the value of eliminating the Global Gag Rule becomes very clear. In addition to affirming that the United States is committed to women’s health and rights, to global health and development, and to the principles of informed choice, the impact on “the street” would be significant. In rural communities across Africa, where the only clinic in an entire district may be one supported by the United States, people notice and are thankful.

To be sure, there is much more to be done to ensure that every woman has access to high-quality reproductive and maternal health care, and funding increases are needed. The simple fact is that U.S. support for overseas family planning is lower today than it was in the mid-1990s, even though demand is higher and rising every day. But first things first: I hope you will join me in calling on President-elect Obama to lift the Global Gag Rule during his first 100 days in office. Visit engenderhealth.org/globalgag to sign a petition asking for just that.

Monday, January 5, 2009

Dr. Isaiah Ndong, EngenderHealth's Vice President of Programs, appeared on the educational television show Future Choices. He presents a compelling case for why we must urge President-elect Obama to overturn the Global Gag Rule, a policy which has left millions in developing countries without basic health services, such as family planning, obstetric care, HIV testing, and malaria treatment. The 30-minute show is presented here in three ten-minute segments.

Friday, January 2, 2009

A final rule (PDF, 76KB) on USAID’s Partner Vetting System (PVS) was published January 2, in the Federal Register.

The PVS rule requires recipients of USAID funds to collect and submit personal information on its principal officers that government personnel could use for security screening. When the rule was first proposed in 2007, EngenderHealth, along with other organizations, voiced concerns over the requirement, which violates civil rights protected by the Privacy Act of 1974 and could jeopardize the safety of employees working in developing countries.

The rule goes into effect 30 days from the date of publication, and it will be up to the incoming Obama administration to decide whether it wants to implement the PVS. We will continue to keep you informed on the latest developments regarding this rule.

Thursday, January 1, 2009

Mark Barone, Senior Medical Associate, co-authored a paper in the journal Vaccine on preparing for human papillomavirus vaccination in South Africa. The abstract is below.

This article reports on qualitative research investigating key challenges and barriers towards human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine introduction in the Western Cape Province, South Africa. A total of 50 in-depth interviews and 6 focus groups were conducted at policy, health service and community levels of enquiry. Respondents expressed overall support for the HPV vaccine, underscored by difficulties associated with the current cervical screening programmes and the burgeoning HIV/AIDS epidemic in South Africa. Overall poor community knowledge of cervical cancer and the causal relationship between HPV and cervical cancer suggests the need for continued education around the importance of regular cervical screening. The optimal target populations for HPV vaccination was influenced by the perceived median age of sexual activity in South African girls (9-15 years), with an underlying concern that high levels of sexual abuse had significantly decreased the age of sexual exposure suggesting vaccination should commence as early as 9 years. Vaccination through schools with the involvement of other stakeholders such as sexual and reproductive health and the advanced programme on immunization (EPI) were suggested. Opposition to the HPV vaccine was not anticipated if the vaccine was marketed as preventing cervical cancer rather than a sexually transmitted infection. The findings assist in identifying potential barriers and facilitating factors towards HPV vaccines and will inform the development of policy and programs to support HPV vaccination introduction in South Africa and other African countries.